[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: exchange type 6?



At 5:24 PM -0500 2/21/01, Andrew Krywaniuk wrote:
>  >   Don't you think that the response Derrell received should
>  > be the response
>  > you receive?
>
>No, I thought the WG and IANA should have accomodated Derrell's request.
>
>I believe it is more important to be sensible than to be consistent. Others
>may disagree.
>
>Reserving exchange mode 6 doesn't mean the WG has to give credence to config
>mode. They can allocate it as "deprecated" for all I care.
>

I tend to agree with Dan here, although there is legitimate room for 
disagreement. Formally allocating a number to a proposed anything 
gives it credence in the eyes of many users. Some folks feel that 
it's OK to do this allocation even if the proposed thing does not 
become a standard, e.g., to facilitate testing etc.

Personally I vote for sensible AND consistent :-)

Steve



Follow-Ups: References: